Section 24 the Prevention of Money- Laundering Act,
Certainly! Here's a detailed explanation of Section 24 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) along with relevant case law.
🔹 Section 24 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002
Title: Burden of proof
🔸 Text Summary of Section 24
Who bears the burden of proof?
In any proceeding under this Act, the burden of proving that the proceeds of crime are untainted property lies on the person accused of money laundering.
Effect:
This means the accused has to prove that the property involved is legitimate and not connected to any criminal activity.
Purpose:
To shift the onus onto the accused, making prosecution easier given the complexities involved in money laundering cases.
🔸 Key Points
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Burden on whom? | Person accused of money laundering |
| What to prove? | Property is untainted (not proceeds of crime) |
| Nature of burden | Legal burden on accused |
| Reason for burden shift | Complex nature of money laundering investigations |
🔸 Related Sections
Section 5: Offence of money laundering
Section 8: Investigation powers
Section 11: Attachment of property
Section 19: Adjudicating Authority’s role
🔸 Important Case Laws on Section 24 PMLA
🧑â€âš–ï¸ Nirav Modi v. Enforcement Directorate, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 1086
Issue: Whether the accused can be required to prove the legitimacy of property
Held:
Section 24 places the burden of proof on the accused to show the property is untainted.
It is a statutory provision and must be complied with in trial.
This is to deal with the difficulty of proving origin of property in money laundering.
🧑â€âš–ï¸ Enforcement Directorate v. Mohd. Mansha, AIR 2019 SC 1386
Issue: Burden of proof under PMLA
Held:
The accused must discharge the burden by producing credible evidence showing the source of property is legitimate.
Mere denial or vague explanations are insufficient.
🧑â€âš–ï¸ Enforcement Directorate v. Shubhranshu Kumar Singh, (2020)
Held: Burden under Section 24 is not absolute but evidentiary, i.e., the accused must at least raise a plausible defense.
🔸 Summary
Section 24 PMLA is a reverse burden provision, which shifts the onus to the accused to prove the property is legitimate.
This provision is important due to the complexity of tracing proceeds of crime in money laundering.
Accused must provide credible evidence to discharge this burden, failing which can lead to conviction.
RELATED Blog
0 comments